Will "Big" John McCarthy Officiate WEC 46?
Jason Probst speculates if noted referee "Big" John McCarthy will work January 10th's WEC 46 event in Sacramento given McCarthy is licensed to officiate in the state. In other words, WEC 46 is a point of no return test for Zuffa to see if there really is a not-so invisible hand of a blackball on McCarthy.
I'll follow the story for the readers, but I wanted to post this excerpt from Probst's piece because it nicely articulates the strength of McCarthy's position - competency, best practices and efficiency in a world of chaos, ignorance and confusion:
In the fast-growing sport, the increasing demand for officials has placed a burden on state commissions trying to keep pace with the exploding workload from more events. That can translate into inconsistent officiating, ranging from how rounds are scored to when restarts are enacted and when fights are stopped. McCarthy has worked extensively to help standardize these concepts across jurisdictions, regularly teaching seminars so officials can be more consistent, regardless of what level show they are officiating. McCarthy also launched his own training program, COMMAND (Certification of Officials for Mixed Martial Arts Development), for referees and judges in December 2007 and holds courses every couple of months.
"If you’ve ever sat down with John and had him explain to you how he referees and protects the athletes and gets his job done, it’s amazing," said Strikeforce CEO Coker. "The education and knowledge he has is unbelievable. I sat down with him almost three months ago and it was like taking a seminar. There’s nobody better qualified than John."
Both Zuffa and McCarthy have gone on the record recognizing there's historically been some disputes between parties, but both have also said they have no substantive problem with the other. If that's the case, why can't a working arrangement be made?
I don't think Zuffa's implied argument with McCarthy is out of bounds. It's ok to ask questions about a judge's or referee's bias after working the broadcast circuit and offering candid commentary.
Ultimately, though, the dispute falls apart when the rubber meets the road. When you actually try to cobble together a case against McCarthy's that rests on a) figuring out some semblance of a coherent worldview and b) that said worldview would cause him to betray his record of general excellence in favor of disrupting Zuffa's operations, you realize this is highly, highly improbable. It takes a big leap in logic to assume McCarthy will tailor stoppages or not enforce the Unified Rules to adjust outcomes against Zuffa's inferred interests.
If one of the competitors is from McCarthy's gym, then he should not referee the bout. Short of that, he belongs in the cage and particularly in meaningful bouts. Let's see what happens January 10th.
20 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why would he have not worked UFC 104 but be allowed to work this event?
by ufc4 on Nov 27, 2009 10:44 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I am kinda wondering too. You’d think that you’d see Big John at least once in a while. Look at how much Dana hates Mazzigotti but he still does UFC events. I doubt Dana would rather have Maz. over John if they’re both sanctioned in the state where the event takes place. SO I don’t understand what keeps John out of UFC events but Maz can still get assigned by the state commission. I also doubt Dana and Zuffa would purposefully pick venues in states where John isn’t licensed
Don’t get me wrong BJM is a great ref, but I don’t think he does himself any good appearing on HDNet the day before Fedor vs. Rogers and talking how great the Russian is and then the day after officiating his fight.
You don’t see any sports officials do that.
http://www.mmarocks.pl
https://twitter.com/mmarocks_pl
Right, and the stoppage was totally justified. That’s the point. People keep acting like this alleged bias will show up in performance and it doesn’t.
by Luke Thomas on Nov 27, 2009 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
I’m a member of a profession with a serious ethical code of conduct and standards of independence. The standard that I’m held to in matters where I’m supposed to be independent is not the “absence of conflicts of interest”, it’s “the absence of the appearance of conflicts of interest”. The reason why it’s the latter and not the former is that even the appearance of conflicts of interest undermines the public confidence in my profession.
by Jahbulon on Nov 27, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
That's fine
Your’s is a better standard, but MMA is in a bad position and needs all the help it can get. Particularly when the help is good.
If you want to take that stance on principle, I won’t bicker with you. But I’d rather get better stoppages, better dissemination of best practices, better judges and better standards. I believe McCarthy can compartmentalize enough to get the job done effectively.
by Luke Thomas on Nov 27, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
Why does one problem need to be fixed by creating another problem? Why can’t John just cut out the extra curricular activities like taking sides in promotional wars and appearing in hype videos for fighters? If you and others are going to use your public platforms to put pressure on Zuffa to bring him back, why not simultaneously put some pressure on John to acknowledge these issues exist and quit engaging in the types of activities that created this problem in the first place?
by Jahbulon on Nov 27, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 8 recs
Yeah, it seems like everyone is on BJM’s side here and while acknowledging he has done some stupid things they still insist that Zuffa should just look past it and act like nothing has happened. Big John needs to man up and admit what he did wasn’t the best idea, maybe then Zuffa would be more willing to welcome him back.
by ufc4 on Nov 27, 2009 1:52 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think this ultimately is in the hands of the AC.
They probably don’t want even a tiny whiff of the possibility of a conflict of interest, so unless Zuffa specifically requests that they want BJM on the card I think the AC will play it safe and not schedule him.
Guillotine.
Doesn’t anyone here or anywhere else REALLY believe BJM would try and sabotage a fight to hurt Zuffa? I mean seriously, it is not his M.O. and it never has been.
I DO find it funny that in this situation, suddenly the Athletic Commission is perched on the ethical high-ground and can’t have any hint of impropriety blah blah blah. Hasn’t there been a hint of impropriety at almost every show recently? They certainly don’t seem too worried about judges who don’t know how to score fights or refs who don’t know when to stop them.
But this whole Big John thing is top priority…it has to be nipped in the bud. Give me a break! I know what’s going on here and its not about ethical principles or “conflicts of interest”.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Nov 27, 2009 12:07 PM EST up reply actions
Its stuff like this
… that makes me tired of seeing behind the curtain. Just pointless conflict that benefits no one while risking the health of the men and women who want to compete in the Greatest Sport.
Appearance is everything
Jahbulon put it better than I can, its the appearance of a conflict that Athletic Commissions must take into consideration when Athletic Commissions decide who to assign to work events.
No where in the article is it mentioned that the AC in CA is the one making the assignments. It would be naive to think that Zuffa has zero influence on the CA AC, but comepletely ignoring the facts of the matter is rather unbalanced coverage.
Even if Zuffa and BJM both go on record and say the beef is squashed, its up the AC to assign him to work an event, even if Zuffa requests to work the event. The article implies Zuffa is the puppet master pulling the CA AC’s strings. While the CA AC doesn’t exactly have the cleanest reputation making the jump to implying that Zuffa can blackball a ref is making a big leap.
Fighters, in some states, are allowed to blackball a referee. The NV AC has stated on record that at least in Championship bouts each fighter is allowed to veto one referee. See Leasn, Brock and Mazagotti, Steve in lead-up to UFC 100. To me that is worse than a promoter vetoing a referee.
I for one would like to see BJM referee as much as possible for as many promotions as possible. Plain and simple he is the best referee in the business, however Joey Crawford is considered one of the best NBA referees and due to his appearance of a conflict of interest with Tim Duncan a few years back he was not assigned to Spurs play-off games. Appearance is everything, the rest is conspiracy theory/Zuffa bent on controlling the world opinions.
Ahhhh…the athletic commissions. Can’t be troubled to have properly trained judges, competent referees, reliable drug testing procedures, proper and thorough medical checks – you wouldn’t want to lose out on your “cash cow” licensing fees and gate receipts – but god forbid they’d ever let the hint of some irrational conspiracy theorists “appearance of bias” make them look bad. That’s where they draw the line.
A lot of good points made in this thread.
I'm like PacMan fightin you silly kids... throw ya Hatton the ring, and get knocked outlike Ricky did.
lol.
Luke, this is a good article, however...
I think you are being far too kind in the issue with him running his own gym. It goes further than just needing to excuse himself from fights that involve fighters that train at his gym.
Fighters whose success or failure would affect the careers of fighters that train at his gym are also in a position to worry about bias.
In the end, judges and refs must remain separated from other aspects of the game lest they damage their ability to perform their primary function, regardless of how good they are at their primary function.

by 















